About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
. >> that is classic harry reid. he said that when why do something he doesn't like. if we agreed to everything he wanted to do he might be happy. nevertheless, this is a serious situation when you talk about a secretary of defense. this is the most important choice a president can make. i think he's made a choice even democrats scratching their head and they were embarrassed also about the performance, unacceptable performance of chuck hagel before the armed services committee . i think it deserves at least a little time to continue to look at what his position and going and leadership he can or can't provide. i don't know what the democratics will circle the wagon and support the president. but many of them have real concerns over whether it a good choice. >> we'll see if they go public with those. senator dan coats, for your time. >> thank you. >> pakistani officials called a deadly bombing a failure of security and intelligence agencies. security official it is did not act because they are scared of what the terrorist may do to them. 81 people were kim 61 others were injured. a mass funeral is
that a cabinet secretary needed 60 votes and both of those bush nominees facing harry reid and democrats and environmental agency head. both had to meet 60 vote threshold. now it has happened to hagel. the third time in ten years. so it's not unprecedented. my question to you, why rush it? >> because the department of defense is responsible for our military. we are currently in conflict right now. i think this is something that has to deal with national security. you really need to get serious and get to work here. we can't be talking about things that are not relevant. they are asking for information about benghazi and chuck hagel had nothing to do with benghazi. if you wanted questions about that you need to talk on other people. >> heather: they got one of those questions answered, that is whether or not president obama himself personally called libyan officials on the night of september 11th but the respect on hagel to get a simple answer which we now know the answer was no. brad? >> you are absolutely right. we had some leverage over the white house and hagel was used at that levera
is scheduled to meet tomorrow wi pelosi and boehner and mitch mcconnell and harry reid but that meeting will come after these automatic spending cuts become law. but some republicans are pointing to positive news. they say that all of these automatic cuts would be re-- could be reversed before they take effect because a long-term spending bill is due march 27th. i'm kyla campbell, ktvu channel 2 news. >>> let's bring you up to date on some of the other top stories we're following for you right now. >> translator: thank you, all, and good night. [ cheers ] >> you saw it live right here on ktvu. that was pope benedict xvi's final public message as pope. the pope spoke from the balcony from the papal retreat in italy. he will formally resign in two hours from now. he thanked the world's $1.2 billion catholics for their love, prayers and support. >>> back here at home, police in santa cruz will go back to work this morning after mourning the loss of two veteran detectives killed in the line of duty. tara moriarty is joining us from santa cruz now with some new information about the death of
reid yesterday filed a motion to limit debate and force vote on the hagel nomination. harry reid said today, though, that republicans are mounting a full-scale filibuster of the hagel nomination. he said that there's never been a filibuster of a secretary of defense in the country's history. discussion on the nomination continues. senator leahy on the senate floor now and that is live on c-span2. also coming up live on booktv.org later today at 7:00 p.m. eastern, stephen hess who wrote "whatever happened to the washington reporters: 1978-2012." he interviewed journalist who is were covered the federal government and washington and 30 years later talked to 283 of those to find out where things went on in their career and the fields they covered. that discussion with stephen hess gets under way at 7:00 and that's at booktv.org. >> we have a habit in this country, if i may say, now of glossing over presidents. we decided, some people, that they're balancedying -- bald eagles and they have to be treated as symbols of the country. what that means, though, is you have -- you have a smoothin
and need more time. it was harry reid who called this vote as sort of an attempt to call their bluff saying this is enough, you're delaying this for no reason but i don't think this is going to help the republicans' image especially when they're going around saying we're not actually trying to stop this nomination. we're not actually filibustering, so what are they doing? i think especially for people who are sick of the sort of washington games, this isn't a good image for them. >> jake, let's talk about this break that congress is on. house speaker nancy pelosi blamed republicans for not using this time more productively. take a listen. >> they manufactured the crisis and instead of having us try to avert that crisis they go on a nine-day recess. why? ? why? people outside the congress are saying no deal, no break. >> why, jake, why? >> nancy pelosi did similar things when she had control but that simplifies a complicated issue. democrats and republicans and the president are miles apart when it comes to averting the sequester. democrats want to raise taxes. republicans say they don't wan
? >> yes. >> yes. thank you, senator. as i understand it on october 2, 2008, majority leader harry reid brought a similar bill to the floor. in fact, it was called the comprehensive iran sanctions accountability act of 2008. and he brought it to the floor in october 2, 2008. there have been media reports that you blocked unanimous consent for the consideration of that bill. are those reports true or not? >> i was one of some republican senators that did not want that vote to go forward. i voted against it in subcommittee. and the reason i did was because the bush administration did not want that bill to go forward. the reason they didn't was because they were involved in negotiations with the russians and the u.n. and security council members to put multilateral sanctions through. >> but just to be clear you did block unanimous contestant. >> i was -- con sent in >> i was part of those who did. >> would it surprise you that an earlier version of those sanctions bill was actually co- sponsored bicek taxpayer cary and clinton and obama at the time? would that surprise you? >> no. not nece
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)